|
FEMA summer camp posted:when it's good it's v. good, when it's bad it's p. funny, but later on (S5 iirc) it's just kinda boring and stupid yeah i heard it got hosed for season 5 and it's bad and nobody should watch it
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:53 |
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Every thread about a blockbuster in CineD is like that now ahaha
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
HULK SMASH PATRIARCHY
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
HULK SMASH THIRD WAVE
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
hulk so lonely...
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Every thread about a blockbuster in CineD is like that now It's because every movie has to be about something. It was better when movies could be not about anything
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 20:04
|
|
|
Speaking of avengers when's Scarlet gonna get them titties out in a movie, cmon girl
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 20:07
|
|
|
i hope there's a movie where she's all naked, but it's only a brief scene and the rest of the movie is just full of dongs 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
y?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 21:13
|
|
|
i hope there's a movie where she takes off her bra only to reveal that she has two huge coiled dicks where her boobs should be
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:i hope there's a movie where she takes off her bra only to reveal that she has two huge coiled dicks where her boobs should be dont ruin things i love
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 21:19
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:i hope there's a movie where she takes off her bra only to reveal that she has two huge coiled dicks where her boobs should be Please don't spoil the Japanimation adaptation, tia.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:i hope there's a movie where she takes off her bra only to reveal that she has two huge coiled dicks where her boobs should be  
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:i hope there's a movie where she takes off her bra only to reveal that she has two huge coiled dicks where her boobs should be wait for the total recall remake.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:11
|
|
|
Deuterieux posted:wait for the total recall remake. i'm looking forward to this TBQH the original movie apparently wasn't meant to be as comedy-y as the source matter (idk was it a book or some poo poo (who the gently caress knows you bitch tits gently caress nigglets))
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:15
|
|
|
Davethulhu posted:Has anyone watched Falling Skies? i caught the series premiere and its god awful. terrible acting, uninteresting characters, cgi ranging from 'hey that's ok' to 'what is this plastic poo poo' the overall premise is kind of interesting though with the alien invasion but whenever a show focuses on kids like this show then i instantly just back away from it since odds are for every haley joel osmont there's about a billion Carls from the Walking Dead
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
falling skies suffers from terrible writing and characters in the same manner as V, terra nova, and walking dead. also it had a 5 minute toy commercial in the middle of an episode. f- do not watch.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:falling skies suffers from terrible writing and characters in the same manner as V, terra nova, and walking dead. also it had a 5 minute toy commercial in the middle of an episode. f- do not watch.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:56
|
|
|
I like Walking Dead but drat if they don't pull some retarded timeline fuckery
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:I like Walking Dead but drat if they don't pull some retarded timeline fuckery i'd love walking dead a lot more if they just got rid of carl holy poo poo or maybe just a better actor
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
qirex posted:you mean to say that the american revolution is not a very good metaphor for alien invasion? that wouldnt matter if the characters didnt all suck and they did interesting things. the dumb metaphor is a symptom, not the cause
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:yeah i heard it got hosed for season 5 and it's bad and nobody should watch it yeah but you do get the end of the londo / g'kar character arcs. and a dreamy long haired blonde dude.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
lord funk posted:yeah but you do get the end of the londo / g'kar character arcs. pretty much why i slogged through season 1 up until the end when the conspiracy serial stuff started
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Every thread about a blockbuster in CineD is like that now lol what is your problem with that poo poo thread really the two or three people actually discussing the movie. why would you go on the internet to listen to people saying "yeah I liked that movie. I liked the bit where titgirl punched that dude" like do you not have friends to do that poo poo with. granted there's maybe a page worth of stuff to say about the avengers if you're wordy so having a whole thread is totally ridiculous but why would you pick on the 2 or 3 people actually using it to talk about poo poo rather than all the zombies insisting Power Rangers 2012 was the best movie of the year because the leucotomist gave out free tickets
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
qntm posted:It's because every movie has to be about something. It was better when movies could be not about anything yeah, they seem to think that every movie should be analyzed as art, even if it obviously isn't i imagine at some point supermechagodzilla is going to explain how the ace ventura sequel was actually a work of genius that is unfairly considered to be a blatant cash grab when it's really a clever deconstruction of such and furthermore TOOT BOOT posted:Speaking of avengers when's Scarlet gonna get them titties out in a movie, cmon girl i thought when they were making "the island" she offered to go topless but michael bay turned her down, and now she says she'll never do it
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
don't you poo poo on supermechagodzilla you plebe
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:don't you poo poo on supermechagodzilla you plebe I like a lot of smg's readings but he definitely puts too much stock in his own opinion Amethyst fucked around with this message at 02:13 on May 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
that awful man posted:i thought when they were making "the island" she offered to go topless but michael bay turned her down, and now she says she'll never do it i'm pretty sure the reason she's all "lol, no" is all the creepy weirdos constantly trying to hack into everyone's cell phones and email accounts and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
like the time when he said Immortals was a post apocalyptic commentary on the nature of history as text because it had some terrible prop and costume work and all these goons said "WOw, that makes SO MUCH SENSE" and everyone with an alternate reading was shouted down
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:24
|
|
|
this episode of firefly where they're defending a whorehouse is terrible
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
supermechagodzilla's movie analysis is a gimmick which the majority of goons don't get, in the same way most of them didn't realize Snow Crash was satire.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
SMG post so much overwrought commentary on movies that something insightful occasionally slips in but I don't see how anyone could think he's serious most of the time The problem is now half the forum consists of SMG clones but for real
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
mutiny. enforce yosrules on all forums. institute yosmods as overmods of glorious new future. there is no cabal. there never was.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:09
|
|
|
everyone saying that "suckerpunch" is terrible are idiots who can't understand the genius of it haven't seen it myself yet and probably won't. gonna watch "hobo with a shotgun" instead but you're all stupid plebes -- supermechagodzilla
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:22
|
|
|
Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:29
|
|
|
Zuul, we learn, was (is) a demigod worshipped in and around Sumeria eight thousand years ago. "Zuul was the minion of Gozer," Dana muses. This alone merits discussion. In a few short sentences, the film grants clear religious context to the supernatural phenomena at hand. This is not secular wizardry or a miscellaneous clutch of horrors. The geographical and historical facts distance Dana's case from the plain-vanilla Western traditions she lives amongst, and the inclusion of demigods in the structure marks a clean break from the Abrahamic monotheistic viewpoint. Dana may not be aware of the significance of all this, but that doesn't change anything; the film's point is that the old traditions are with us whether we hold them or not, part of the city's makeup, locked in the stonework. (For instance, the fabled Marduk and Tiamat would continue their eternal duel in The Real Ghostbusters episode "I Am the City", with Marduk as god of the city—not just Babylon, but the general urban experience.) The streets, the buildings, all those damned statues, are New York's link to its past, the iron scraps of DNA it shares with old gods. Upon learning more of Gozer, Dana asks, "Well, what's he doing in my icebox?", and this may well sum up the film's point about religion as much as anything. A non-believing society—at best one based in lip service—is about to look its wilder psychosocial ancestry in the eye. Our long-forgotten spiritual past is about to infringe upon all our iceboxes.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:29
|
|
|
TOOT BOOT posted:Speaking of avengers when's Scarlet gonna get them titties out in a movie, cmon girl yeah get those white trash areolas out good lord i loves my some bumpy pancakes is that a vein?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:32
|
|
Teh boners
|
z0ratio fartboner posted:yeah get those white trash areolas out fight me bitch
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
If there's any precedent for serious discussion of Ghostbusters, we owe it to politics. Much has been made of the movie's libertarian leanings; just slap together a brief retelling of the Walter Peck plotline, remind people of the time frame and you've got yourself a blog post. Certainly that reading is hard to escape; the film is a definite fan of the free market. My hastily-scribbled initial outline for this project included a chapter on politics and a subsequent chapter on business—it didn't take me long to correct that, because in Ghostbusters, they're basically the same thing. "You have to like a movie," chirps The National Review, "in which the bad guy… is a regulation-happy buffoon from the EPA, and the solution to a public menace comes from the private sector."  A compelling case for limited government It's somewhat more complex than that, but, then, most of Ghostbusters bears closer examination than it gets. Whatever the case, it's not an explicitly political film, even in the moments it celebrates capitalism. The political statements are implicit, submerged in the story rather than taking center stage. This does not equate to neutrality. When a film grosses $238 million domestic, it's worthwhile to consider the messages it's sending—because, clearly, someone out there is absorbing them, even if only subconsciously. "I figure everything we do creatively makes a statement, intended or not," Harold Ramis mused in a Writers Guild interview. "Every romantic comedy is saying something about gender politics. Every depiction of human life can be extended through psychology, sociology. There's semiotics involved." Ramis has never been shy about his liberal views. "I entered college just when people were in the post-Korean-War fraternity wildness," he once told The New York Observer. "You know, no cares, everything looked great, Kennedy, Camelot, our generation taking over the world—and suddenly, my second year of college begins with Kennedy killed, and everything goes to hell… I sang folk songs when everyone else was singing rock-and-roll and I could be outraged about union problems in the railroads and coal mines in the late 19th century." Although less talkative about politics, Dan Aykroyd describes himself as "a dyed-in-the-wool Canadian liberal"; for his part, Ivan Reitman directed Dave, a film practically begging for the term 'Capra-esque'. All three are on record as frequent donators to Democratic campaigns. As such, it's hard to read Ghostbusters as terribly right-wing, even when the government (a government regulator, no less!) is a key villain. No, the film aims wider. The movie isn't anti-government, it's anti-institution. In the tradition of Animal House, Meatballs, Caddyshack and Stripes, the conflict is above all the little guy standing up to the big guy—the misfit Deltas against the Faber College administration, Camp North Star against Camp Mohawk, the Bushwood underclass against the stodgy Judge Smails camp, or John Winger against the U.S. Army. It's a comic setup older than celluoid: the individual against the institution. And America is a nation that roots for the underdog.  The institution oppressing the individual The politics of these films are, more than liberal, populist. They value the needs and the rights of the common people over the august authorities that lord over them. By itself, that tells us little about Ghostbusters—from Voltaire's Candide to Mad magazine and The Simpsons, comedy has long asked us to re-examine the world and the authority figures (and moral authority in general) in charge of it, to look past the hype to the hidden agendas. Indeed, 'question authority' could well be the central theme of comedy. Sometimes it's a kid's first indication that his generation is being sold a bill of goods. But Ghostbusters applies the Harold Ramis brand of populism on terms that'll play in the Reagan years, and our reading of the film is necessarily a reading of the times. Prior decades had their targets, but in the '80s, the oppressor of the hour is government regulation. Fitting Ghostbusters into the trend of anti-authoritarian comedies, Peck and the EPA become nothing but new names for the old enemies; meet the new authority figure, same as the old authority figure. In the end, perhaps the film's cleverness isn't in picking a villain for the times but in convincing us that its target was anything timely. Oppressive institutions are with us always; all the filmmakers did was choose the form of the Destructor. As Ramis tells The Believer: "We tell our kids that policemen are good and God protects us and our country is noble, and at a certain point—for some of us, it comes quite early, at five or six years old—we start to realize that it's all a facade. So the child says, "Well, geesh, the institutions that I'm supposed to respect are telling me things that don't appear to be true. Either I'm crazy or they're crazy.'" ("I don't think you're crazy," as Venkman, ever the rebel, might respond.)
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:53 |
|
|
I have no problem with those ghostbusters posts
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2012 02:39
|
|